Hard questions for Downer on terrorism

Page Tools

Our Foreign Minister's anger over the Philippines withdrawal from Iraq came from a keen awareness of the political stakes involved, writes Tony Parkinson.

In a quiet moment this week, with not a megaphone in sight, Alexander Downer pondered the hypothetical no parent would ever wish to contemplate - what would he do if a member of his own family was taken hostage by terrorists?

Given his unrelenting stance in the global debate on how best to confront terrorism, the Minister for Foreign Affairs knows the question cannot be ducked. Having lambasted the Philippines Government over its strategy to save Angelo de la Cruz from beheading in Iraq, Downer has attracted the inevitable jibe: while he talks tough about choices faced by others, what would he expect Canberra to do if the hostage was not a Filipino truck driver but one of his own children?

During a conversation in Melbourne, Downer wrestled with the answer as best he could: "Putting yourself into the monstrous position where this happened, the first thing I would have do is remove myself from the decision-making process. There's no way I could be objective."

AdvertisementAdvertisement

And what if he was taken hostage himself?

"Well, I know what the decision would be, distressing though it is. I have always been concerned for the rights of individuals, but it has to be balanced against a broader national interest.

"Australian governments from time immemorial have never given in to kidnappers or blackmailers. You have to take that position."

Downer has drawn a lot of flak this week after publicly lecturing Manila and Madrid on the importance of this principle. He claims both countries have effectively "empowered terrorists" by withdrawing troops from Iraq under duress.

His outburst was prompted by a message to "the Australian people" on an Islamist website, demanding the Howard Government pull back its troops from Iraq. Similar threats were made against Japan, Italy, Poland and Bulgaria.

I have always been concerned for the rights of individuals, but it has to be balanced against a broader national interest. ALEXANDER DOWNER

The messages carried apocalyptic warnings about the horrors to be inflicted if these governments refused to comply. But the line that so enraged Downer was this: "Follow the path of the Philippines and Spain. It is the correct path, which guarantees you a safe and secure life."

It was a craven taunt, compounding a feeling of cold contempt in Canberra, and not just within the Howard Government. Within days of the release of de la Cruz, terrorists in Iraq had taken eight more foreigners hostage. Yesterday came grim reports of two Pakistanis being beheaded.

Although Labor has taken Downer to task over his management of the diplomacy, the Opposition has been strictly bipartisan on the core proposition. No deals with terrorists. Full stop.

Closing ranks across the political divide on this question is sensible - unless anyone seriously wants to open this harrowing debate to election politics. For either side, this would be not only irresponsible but dangerous. Why? Because it only helps persuade terrorists that their psychological warfare can tweak anxieties and make governments in the West dance and jiggle.

The latest edition of The New Yorker magazine carries a haunting postscript to the Madrid bombings. On March 11, the very day of the train explosions that killed 191 people, a research institute in Norway, Forsvarets, came across an intriguing document on an Islamist website.

The document argued the US-led coalition in Iraq could not be defeated by a guerilla insurgency, and set out an alternative game plan. Only by persuading key European coalition partners to leave Iraq, it prophesied, could Islamists hope to expose America's vulnerabilities.

Britain, it said, was unlikely to withdraw unless there was a quantum leap in its casualty count. Poland, too, was resolute.

But Spain, the authors argued, was susceptible. "We think the Spanish could not tolerate more than two, maximum three, blows," the document stated clinically. "If the troops still remain in Iraq after these blows, the victory of the Socialist Party is almost secured and the withdrawal of the forces will be on its electoral program."

On this calculation, Spain's departure would put unbearable pressure on other European powers and "the domino tiles would fall quickly".

If this is indeed the ploy, it is cynical, callous and clever, in a devious and demented way. The question is which societies will take the bait.